header-logo header-logo

06 October 2011 / Richard Scorer
Issue: 7484 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Spare change?

Skimping on compensation will fuel an increase in litigation & costs says Richard Scorer

According to the BBC (16 September 2011), the government has cut the budget of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA). The CICA is a taxpayer-funded scheme which awards compensation to victims of violent crime. It will have £10m less this year—a cut of 5%. While the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) maintains that the reduced funding will be sufficient, the victim’s organisation, Victim Support, argues that there is already a “financial time bomb” in the scheme.

Sensible policy?

Is cutting the CICA’s budget a sensible policy, even in narrow accountancy terms? Between 1964 and 1 April 1996 the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board (CICB) awarded damages to victims of violent crime on the same basis as the civil courts. In 1995 the then home secretary, Michael Howard, deemed the CICB scheme too expensive and replaced it with the CICA scheme which came into effect on 1 April 1996.

The 1996 scheme was significantly less generous than the scheme it replaced. Whereas

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll